> The new cameras are supposedly slightly better, but probably not enough to be noticeable unless you've got a highly trained eye.
This is completely nuts. The camera on the 3GS was the first acceptable camera in an iPhone, but it was nothing special. The 4S camera rivals dedicated point-and-shoot cameras for quality, and the 5's should be even better. The difference between the 3GS and the 4S (I've had both) is extremely noticeable.
And the idea that internet browsing speed would be unaffected, when the 5 has a way faster CPU and fricken LTE is so bizarre I can't even begin to understand how you make that statement. Are you somehow under the impression that internet browsing speed on the 3GS was already being bottlenecked by the remote server?
>> 4S camera rivals dedicated point-and-shoot cameras for quality
Good enough to replace vs. rivalling for quality aren't the same thing. I'm not sure what you said (i.e. "rivals") is true, given how much larger the sensor is in a dedicated point and shoot.
And keep in mind, that in good light, even a camera phone produces really nice images. Once you get into adverse conditions, things start to get dicey.
This is completely nuts. The camera on the 3GS was the first acceptable camera in an iPhone, but it was nothing special. The 4S camera rivals dedicated point-and-shoot cameras for quality, and the 5's should be even better. The difference between the 3GS and the 4S (I've had both) is extremely noticeable.
And the idea that internet browsing speed would be unaffected, when the 5 has a way faster CPU and fricken LTE is so bizarre I can't even begin to understand how you make that statement. Are you somehow under the impression that internet browsing speed on the 3GS was already being bottlenecked by the remote server?